On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 19:05:03 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

You may have noticed that I was talking slightly with tongue in
cheek, to show that there was another side to the argument. Of
course argument by intimidation isn't valid.

AKA argumentum ad baculum.

However, while perhaps one could come up with some complicated
philosophical or evolutionary rationale for saying that the
Holocaust was, oh, suboptimal or something...

Indeed, that's an excellent way to approach the question.

to most people, the notion of moral absolutes, existing
irrevocably and independently of human wishes or fashions, is
easily understandable.

Sadly true. Because so many people are programmed into their beliefs
as children and never educated in the methods of actually thinking
critically. Critical thinking is not something that occurs naturally
in most people.

And while no empirical guide to exactly
what those rights are may exist, a whole bunch of them seem to be
sufficiently obvious to obtain consensus.

I'd say there are actually very few things that could be described as
nearly universal moral beliefs across all cultures. Very, very few.